Making Sense of Hybrid Practices: The role of individual adherence to institutional logics in impact investing

IF 4.9 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Organization Studies Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1177/01708406231181693

Arthur Gautier, Anne-Claire Pache, Filipe Santos

{"title":"Making Sense of Hybrid Practices: The role of individual adherence to institutional logics in impact investing","authors":"Arthur Gautier, Anne-Claire Pache, Filipe Santos","doi":"10.1177/01708406231181693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hybrid practices combine core elements of different institutional logics. As such, they elicit contrasting responses from individuals, including ignoring, rejecting and adopting them. Yet, extant research in institutional theory does not explain how individuals come to form these responses. To address this gap, we adopt a sensemaking perspective and conduct an inductive, comparative case study of 14 wealthy individuals based on life story interviews, examining their responses to impact investing, an emergent hybrid practice combining elements of the philanthropy and finance logics. Our study uncovers key contextual mechanisms by which institutions influence how individuals respond to hybrid practices, a neglected dimension in sensemaking studies. In particular, we show how individuals’ degree of adherence to the logics involved shapes how they notice, interpret and finally respond to impact investing. Contrary to what previous research suggests, our study shows that individuals who are merely familiar with the logics at play are better positioned than both novices and individuals who identify with the logics to evaluate hybrid practices positively and adopt them.","PeriodicalId":48423,"journal":{"name":"Organization Studies","volume":"44 1","pages":"1385 - 1412"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organization Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231181693","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Hybrid practices combine core elements of different institutional logics. As such, they elicit contrasting responses from individuals, including ignoring, rejecting and adopting them. Yet, extant research in institutional theory does not explain how individuals come to form these responses. To address this gap, we adopt a sensemaking perspective and conduct an inductive, comparative case study of 14 wealthy individuals based on life story interviews, examining their responses to impact investing, an emergent hybrid practice combining elements of the philanthropy and finance logics. Our study uncovers key contextual mechanisms by which institutions influence how individuals respond to hybrid practices, a neglected dimension in sensemaking studies. In particular, we show how individuals’ degree of adherence to the logics involved shapes how they notice, interpret and finally respond to impact investing. Contrary to what previous research suggests, our study shows that individuals who are merely familiar with the logics at play are better positioned than both novices and individuals who identify with the logics to evaluate hybrid practices positively and adopt them.

查看原文本刊更多论文

理解混合实践：个人对制度逻辑的坚持在影响力投资中的作用

混合实践结合了不同制度逻辑的核心要素。因此，它们会引起个人的不同反应，包括忽视、拒绝和采用它们。然而，现存的制度理论研究并没有解释个人是如何形成这些反应的。为了解决这一差距，我们采用了一种感性的视角，并根据生活故事采访对14名富人进行了归纳、比较的案例研究，考察他们对影响力投资的反应，这是一种新兴的混合实践，结合了慈善和金融逻辑的元素。我们的研究揭示了机构影响个人如何应对混合实践的关键背景机制，这是感知研究中被忽视的一个维度。特别是，我们展示了个人对相关逻辑的遵守程度如何影响他们对影响力投资的注意、解释和最终反应。与之前的研究表明的相反，我们的研究表明，仅仅熟悉逻辑的人比新手和认同逻辑的人更适合积极评估混合实践并采用它们。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Organization Studies MANAGEMENT-

CiteScore

11.50

自引率

16.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Organisation Studies (OS) aims to promote the understanding of organizations, organizing and the organized, and the social relevance of that understanding. It encourages the interplay between theorizing and empirical research, in the belief that they should be mutually informative. It is a multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal which is open to contributions of high quality, from any perspective relevant to the field and from any country. Organization Studies is, in particular, a supranational journal which gives special attention to national and cultural similarities and differences worldwide. This is reflected by its international editorial board and publisher and its collaboration with EGOS, the European Group for Organizational Studies. OS publishes papers that fully or partly draw on empirical data to make their contribution to organization theory and practice. Thus, OS welcomes work that in any form draws on empirical work to make strong theoretical and empirical contributions. If your paper is not drawing on empirical data in any form, we advise you to submit your work to Organization Theory – another journal under the auspices of the European Group for Organizational Studies (EGOS) – instead.